07 October 2006

don't normally post my speaking schedules and travel plans here on the blog. But this week, I'm going to make an exception, because I want to invite all PyroManiacs readers within driving distance of the Tampa Bay area to the second annual Brandon Biblical Theology Conference where I'll be speaking this coming Thursday and Friday.

Even apart from the Brandon conference, I have a jam-packed schedule this week. Virtually every missionary supported by Grace Community Church will be in San Diego for our church's biennial missionary conference. I'll be leading a seminar Monday on ministry in postmodern times, and I'll give a short update to the missionaries on Tuesday about Grace to You, our international outreach, and the new "Grace to You" television broadcast.

In the past these missionary conferences have taken place at various locations on the foreign mission field. They are wonderful opportunities to connect with our missionaries all at once, and to keep them informed about what's going on at Grace Church, what evangelical issues and theological trends we are concerned or encouraged about, and give them a time of rest and fellowship together.

This year, however, the get-together is close to home because Sunday is Grace Church's 50th Anniversary Celebration. So it's a big week and promises to be a memorable one. If I'm mostly silent on the blog, you will understand.

Ken Silvawrestles with the guilt-by-association issue and the need to resist the influence of quasi-evangelicals, medieval mystics, and rank liberals who make up the core of the "contemplative spirituality" cabal, and who seem intent on using their influence among evangelicals to undermine historic Protestant and evangelical distinctives. He rightly points out that some associations are in fact guilty. For the record, I understand Ken's concern, and I do wish otherwise solid evangelical leaders were more cautious about whom they quote and whose books they recommend without qualification. But I still remain firmly convinced that it's wrong and unfair to discredit an otherwise godly teacher, write him off entirely, or label him a heretic based solely on whom he quotes from. Since we can't see hearts or judge motives, our evaluation of a man's soundness (or not) should be made according to what he himself actually teaches, and not according to what he reads or cites. So I still think guilt-by-association arguments are invalid and ineffective and are better avoided.

Jenson, I'll be in the UK the first week of December. On the weekend, I'll be speaking at a men's conference in Kent. I probably won't be able to get to the Met Tab for a regular service (unless my Sunday evening turns out to be unscheduled and I can work out a way to get there from Kent in time for the evening service). I also have a board meeting in London later that week. My schedule for the rest of the week isn't fully clear yet, but I hope to be able to stop by and visit Dr. Masters during while I'm in the UK.

Thank you for bringing notice to this article. First of all I agree with you. I am planning to expand this article to make it clearer that I am not in favor of GBA condemnation, which I didn't bring out enough there.

The main point I was getting at in this initial piece was that it isn't GBA when one can show (as I did in the article) clear connections between certain individuals.

This is not a type of argument I'm in favor of but I was arguing in reverse that the GBA accusation, which is what your quote was used to show, is too easily thrown around itself.

I hope that makes my point clearer. We are much better off to be "Joe Fridays," as it were, and say: "Just the facts, m'am."

The Rules

PREMISE: DO NOT comment at all if you think the "right way" to handle Christian disagreement is to make an appointment and chat over coffee first. The vortex of irony you will create by commenting will sap the hair-care products off your stylish bed-head, and we do not want to be responsible for that.

Remember that you are our guests. We will, at our discretion, delete comments that we find off-topic, derailing, un-civil, slanderous, trollish or troll-feeding, petulant, pestiferous, and/or otherwise obnoxious and non-constructive. If we warn you, stop it. After no more than three warnings, you will find yourself banned, and all your future comments will be immediately deleted.

See an error in the post? How clever of you! Email the author. If you comment a correction, expect the comment to disappear with the error.

If you are confused about how the specifics of these principles play out in practical terms, you'll find a longer list of rules HERE.

Followers

Stats Attack!

Disclaimer

The opinions expressed in this blog do not necessarily represent the views of all contributors. Each individual is responsible for the facts and opinions contained in his posts. Generally, we agree. But not always.